Affect, Framing, and Persuasion

177 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Multiple emotional contagions in service encounters (2011, background): “Keller et al. (2003) suggested that participants’ emotional levels before an experiment affect the validity of an experiment.”
The Advantages of Compliance or the Disadvantages of Noncompliance? A Meta-Analytic Review of the Relative Persuasive Effectiveness of Gain-Framed and Loss-Framed Messages (2006, methodology): “…and reported as Broemer (2004) Study 1 combined; data from Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 by Keller et al. (2003) were combined and reported as Keller et al. (2003); data from Experiments 1, 4A, and 5 by A.Lee and Aaker (2004) were combined and reported as A.Lee and Aaker (2004) grape juice…”
Getting Emotional about Health (2007, background): “Keller, Lipkus, and Rimer (2003) demonstrate that positive and negative mood states influence consumers’ perceptions of vulnerability, thus influencing the effectiveness of health messages.”
Guilt versus Shame: Coping, Fluency, and Framing in the Effectiveness of Responsible Drinking Messages (2012, background): “…Framing in the Effectiveness of Responsible Drinking Messages Negative emotional appeals are among the most frequently used means of persuading consumers to comply with health-related public service advertisements (Agrawal and Duhachek 2010; Keller and Lehmann 2008; Keller, Lipkus, and Rimer 2003).”