April 4-6, 2024 • Hyatt Regency • Lexington, KY
Innovations in Health Communication
Innovations in Health Communication
Abstract: Messaging for Future Pandemic Preparedness: Effects of Moral Framing
With the application of moral foundations theory and moral framing, we explored how moral foundations as communication tactics affect public judgments about federal R&D investment for future pandemic preparedness after the era of COVID-19.
We conducted a between-subjects online experiment with a sample of adults residing in the U.S. using a Prolific panel (N = 218) in April 2023. Participants were randomly assigned to read one of two messages: a message using an individualizing moral frame vs. a message using a binding moral frame, then were asked to answer a series of survey items, including perceived message credibility and their views and decisions on the science issue. All participants were paid $2.67 for participating in the survey that took approximately 14 minutes to complete. The average age of the participants was in their early 40s. They reported identifying gender as male (48.2%), female (49.1%), transgender or other (1.8%). Of the sample, about 75.7% reported White/Caucasian, followed by 9.2% of Black/African American.
RQ1. Does moral frame (i.e., individualizing vs. binding moral framing) affect perceived message credibility?
RQ2. How, if at all, do individuals’ moral foundations moderate the link between moral frame and perceived message credibility?
RQ3. Does increased message credibility (in RQ1&2) increase a sense of responsibility for moral engagement with future pandemic preparedness?
RQ4. Does increased message moral engagement (in RQ3) lead to stronger support for federal spending on R&D for future pandemic preparedness?
We ran the PROCESS macro that uses the bootstrapping with 5,000 iterations and bias correction method to answer our research questions (Hayes, 2017). Here is a summary of the key findings. First, compared to a message employing binding moral foundation operating words, when the message employs individualizing moral foundation operating words, respondents are more likely to perceive the message to be credible (B = 2.14, p < .05). Second, there was a significant interaction effect between moral framing and individuals’ binding moral foundations in influencing perceived message credibility (B = -.35, p < .01), while no significant interaction was found between moral framing and individualizing moral foundations. Third, perceived message credibility increases a sense of responsibility for moral engagement with future pandemic preparedness (B = .65, p < .01) which in turn draws their support for federal spending on R&D for future pandemic preparedness (indirect effect = -.07, SE = .03, BC 95% CI [-.14, -.01]. However, the serial mediating effects only appeared among those who endorse low levels of binding moral foundations (indirect effect = .05, SE = .03, BC 95% CI [.003, .13]).
We believe this study offers theoretical and practical contributions. First, we validated that moral foundations based on ideological orientation can be used as a persuasion strategy. Second, we took value-oriented approaches in designing persuasive messages to help reduce the tensions between the polarized public on controversial issues. Also, we demonstrated the serial mediating effect of perceived message credibility and a sense of responsibility for moral engagement in such communication processes.
We conducted a between-subjects online experiment with a sample of adults residing in the U.S. using a Prolific panel (N = 218) in April 2023. Participants were randomly assigned to read one of two messages: a message using an individualizing moral frame vs. a message using a binding moral frame, then were asked to answer a series of survey items, including perceived message credibility and their views and decisions on the science issue. All participants were paid $2.67 for participating in the survey that took approximately 14 minutes to complete. The average age of the participants was in their early 40s. They reported identifying gender as male (48.2%), female (49.1%), transgender or other (1.8%). Of the sample, about 75.7% reported White/Caucasian, followed by 9.2% of Black/African American.
RQ1. Does moral frame (i.e., individualizing vs. binding moral framing) affect perceived message credibility?
RQ2. How, if at all, do individuals’ moral foundations moderate the link between moral frame and perceived message credibility?
RQ3. Does increased message credibility (in RQ1&2) increase a sense of responsibility for moral engagement with future pandemic preparedness?
RQ4. Does increased message moral engagement (in RQ3) lead to stronger support for federal spending on R&D for future pandemic preparedness?
We ran the PROCESS macro that uses the bootstrapping with 5,000 iterations and bias correction method to answer our research questions (Hayes, 2017). Here is a summary of the key findings. First, compared to a message employing binding moral foundation operating words, when the message employs individualizing moral foundation operating words, respondents are more likely to perceive the message to be credible (B = 2.14, p < .05). Second, there was a significant interaction effect between moral framing and individuals’ binding moral foundations in influencing perceived message credibility (B = -.35, p < .01), while no significant interaction was found between moral framing and individualizing moral foundations. Third, perceived message credibility increases a sense of responsibility for moral engagement with future pandemic preparedness (B = .65, p < .01) which in turn draws their support for federal spending on R&D for future pandemic preparedness (indirect effect = -.07, SE = .03, BC 95% CI [-.14, -.01]. However, the serial mediating effects only appeared among those who endorse low levels of binding moral foundations (indirect effect = .05, SE = .03, BC 95% CI [.003, .13]).
We believe this study offers theoretical and practical contributions. First, we validated that moral foundations based on ideological orientation can be used as a persuasion strategy. Second, we took value-oriented approaches in designing persuasive messages to help reduce the tensions between the polarized public on controversial issues. Also, we demonstrated the serial mediating effect of perceived message credibility and a sense of responsibility for moral engagement in such communication processes.