When Are Loss Frames More Effective in Climate Change Communication? An Application of Fear Appeal Theory

This study investigated how goal frames (gain, non-loss, loss) either with or without efficacy statements affect consumers’ support for climate-change policy. Addressing the goal-framing literature’s difficulty in establishing a guiding theory consistent findings, we (1) propose fear appeal as an alternative framework to guide research; (2) test five variables (fear, perceived threat, hope, efficacy, and message processing) mediators of effects on policy support; (3) highlight four common confounds that may partly underlie inconsistent findings. Aligning theory, results from carefully controlled experiment revealed more threatening loss frame paired statement produced strongest pro-policy attitudes greatest willingness-to-pay by successfully balancing fear/threat hope/efficacy producing deeper processing.