THE ROLE OF REGULATORY FOCUS IN MESSAGE FRAMING IN ANTISMOKING ADVERTISEMENTS FOR ADOLESCENTS

By Yeung‐Jo Kim. 2006

186 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Literature and Literary Theory, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/33aebfe763e2bceed3b26a026cf8d513c46bbe4c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Applied Psychology

1. Richard E. Petty
2. P. Briñol
3. J. Teeny
4. Joseph J. Siev
5. Sukki Yoon
6. Jason Q. Zhang
7. Sun-Young Park
8. Joseph Cesario

In Literature and Literary Theory

1. Richard E. Petty
2. P. Briñol
3. Joseph J. Siev
4. Sukki Yoon
5. Jason Q. Zhang
6. Sun-Young Park
7. J. Teeny
8. Joseph Cesario

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

1. Sukki Yoon
2. Sun-Young Park
3. Cynthia R. Morton
4. Tae Hyun Baek

Citations in the corpus

• A self-regulatory framework for message framing☆ (2013, background): “…in order to understand framing effects (e.g., Updegraff et al., 2007), with a number of studies utilizing regulatory focus theory (e.g., Jain, Lindsey, Agrawal, & Maheswaran, 2007; Keller, 2006; Kim, 2006; Latimer et al., 2008; Lee & Aaker, 2004; Rothman et al., 2008; Zhao & Pechmann, 2007).”
• Guilt and Shame: Environmental Message Framing Effects (2017, background): “Much research has examined the role of regulatory focus in message framing effects and has supported goal compatibility effects (Aaker and Lee 2001; Baek and Reid 2013; Kareklas, Carlson, and Muehling 2012; Kees, Burton, and Tangari 2010; Kim 2006; Park and Morton 2015; Sung and Choi 2011).”
• When does electronic word-of-mouth matter? A study of consumer product reviews☆ (2010, background): “Numerous prior studies show that different self-regulatory systems can generate biases in consumers' perceptions (e.g., Aaker and Lee, 2001; Chernev, 2004; Kim, 2006; Lee andAaker, 2000, 2004; PhamandAvnet, 2004; Poels andDewitte, 2007; Yeo and Park, 2006).”
• The Role of Regulatory Focus, Social Distance, and Involvement in Anti-High-Risk Drinking Advertising: A Construal-Level Theory Perspective (2015, background): “Previous research (e.g., Kim 2006) suggests that participants rate advertising messages as more persuasive when the fit between the chronic regulatory goal and the message framing is congruent.”
• A Review and Conceptual Framework for Understanding Personalized Matching Effects in Persuasion (2020, background): “In either case, research clearly shows that matching the content of a message to regulatory focus tends to produce positive persuasion outcomes (i.e., referred to as regulatory fit; Cesario et al., 2013; Kim, 2006; Fransen et al., 2010; for reviews, see Motyka et al. (2013), Rothman et al. (2020)).”