IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/inrvec/v72y2025i1d10.1007_s12232-024-00482-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A simple message and two framings to enhance protective behaviours adoption in a pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Beatrice Braut

    (University of Turin
    University of Genoa)

  • Matteo Migheli

    (University of Turin)

Abstract

The paper tests the effect of a simple message and its framing on personal protective behaviours, using a survey experiment during the first Italian lockdown. Findings reveal that, for washing hands and using a face cover, intentions to comply are higher with the message and do not differ by message type. For physical distance, there is no difference due to the introduction of any message. Compliance is higher for females and increases with age. Looking at males separately a treatment effect exists: the negatively framed message is more effective. In a follow-up survey, a selected subsample of subjects reports their actual engagement. The gap is the largest relative to physical distance. To be useful a message has to be timing and can just remind a simple point. The content and the frame of the message have limited importance.

Suggested Citation

  • Beatrice Braut & Matteo Migheli, 2025. "A simple message and two framings to enhance protective behaviours adoption in a pandemic," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 72(1), pages 1-29, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:inrvec:v:72:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s12232-024-00482-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s12232-024-00482-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12232-024-00482-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12232-024-00482-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lozza, Edoardo & Carrera, Sonia & Bosio, A. Claudio, 2010. "Perceptions and outcomes of a fiscal bonus: Framing effects on evaluations and usage intentions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 400-404, June.
    2. Campos-Mercade, Pol & Meier, Armando N. & Schneider, Florian H. & Wengström, Erik, 2021. "Prosociality predicts health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 195(C).
    3. Brandts, Jordi & Giritligil, Ayça Ebru & Weber, Roberto A., 2015. "An experimental study of persuasion bias and social influence in networks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 214-229.
    4. Alfredo Di Tillio & Marco Ottaviani & Peter Norman Sørensen, 2017. "Persuasion Bias in Science: Can Economics Help?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 266-304, October.
    5. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli & Valerio Capraro & Roberto Di Paolo, 2020. "The effect of norm-based messages on reading and understanding COVID-19 pandemic response governmental rules," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S), pages 45-55, June.
    6. Holler, Marianne & Hoelzl, Erik & Kirchler, Erich & Leder, Susanne & Mannetti, Lucia, 2008. "Framing of information on the use of public finances, regulatory fit of recipients and tax compliance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 597-611, August.
    7. Corazzini, Luca & Pavesi, Filippo & Petrovich, Beatrice & Stanca, Luca, 2012. "Influential listeners: An experiment on persuasion bias in social networks," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1276-1288.
    8. Jay J. Van Bavel & Katherine Baicker & Paulo S. Boggio & Valerio Capraro & Aleksandra Cichocka & Mina Cikara & Molly J. Crockett & Alia J. Crum & Karen M. Douglas & James N. Druckman & John Drury & Oe, 2020. "Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 460-471, May.
    9. Fujimoto, Hiroaki & Park, Eun-Soo, 2010. "Framing effects and gender differences in voluntary public goods provision experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 455-457, August.
    10. Seres, Gyula & Balleyer, Anna & Cerutti, Nicola & Friedrichsen, Jana & Süer, Müge, 2021. "Face mask use and physical distancing before and after mandatory masking: No evidence on risk compensation in public waiting lines," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 765-781.
    11. Böhm, Robert & Theelen, Maik M.P., 2016. "Outcome valence and externality valence framing in public good dilemmas," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 151-163.
    12. Alfredo Di Tillio & Marco Ottaviani & Peter Norman Sørensen, 2017. "Persuasion Bias in Science: Can Economics Help?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(605), pages 266-304, October.
    13. Ceren Baysan, 2022. "Persistent Polarizing Effects of Persuasion: Experimental Evidence from Turkey," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(11), pages 3528-3546, November.
    14. Iturbe-Ormaetxe, Iñigo & Ponti, Giovanni & Tomás, Josefa & Ubeda, Luis, 2011. "Framing effects in public goods: Prospect Theory and experimental evidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 439-447, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hamza Umer, 2023. "Stability of pro-sociality and trust amid the Covid-19: panel data from the Netherlands," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 50(1), pages 255-287, February.
    2. Maximilian Kasy & Jann Spiess, 2022. "Optimal Pre-Analysis Plans: Statistical Decisions Subject to Implementability," Papers 2208.09638, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
    3. Dahm, Matthias & González, Paula & Porteiro, Nicolás, 2018. "The enforcement of mandatory disclosure rules," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 21-32.
    4. Ricardo Alonso & Odilon Câmara, 2024. "Organizing Data Analytics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(5), pages 3123-3143, May.
    5. Markus Mobius & Tuan Phan & Adam Szeidl, 2015. "Treasure Hunt: Social Learning in the Field," NBER Working Papers 21014, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Grimalda, Gianluca & Murtin, Fabrice & Pipke, David & Putterman, Louis & Sutter, Matthias, 2023. "The politicized pandemic: Ideological polarization and the behavioral response to COVID-19," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    7. Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin & Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2013. "Cooperation: The Power Of A Single Word? Some Experimental Evidence On Wording And Gender Effects In A Game Of Chicken," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 43-64, January.
    8. Maximilian Kasy & Jann Spiess, 2022. "Rationalizing Pre-Analysis Plans:Statistical Decisions Subject to Implementability," Economics Series Working Papers 975, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    9. Isabel Melguizo, 2019. "Homophily and the Persistence of Disagreement," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(619), pages 1400-1424.
    10. Jeremy Bertomeu & Davide Cianciaruso, 2018. "Verifiable disclosure," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 65(4), pages 1011-1044, June.
    11. Aleksey Tetenov, 2016. "An economic theory of statistical testing," CeMMAP working papers CWP50/16, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    12. Battiston, Pietro & Stanca, Luca, 2015. "Boundedly rational opinion dynamics in social networks: Does indegree matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 400-421.
    13. Berno Buechel & Stefan Klößner & Martin Lochmüller & Heiko Rauhut, 2020. "The strength of weak leaders: an experiment on social influence and social learning in teams," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 259-293, June.
    14. Henrike Sternberg & Janina Isabel Steinert & Tim Büthe, 2024. "Compliance in the public versus the private realm: Economic preferences, institutional trust and COVID‐19 health behaviors," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(5), pages 1055-1119, May.
    15. Cartwright, Edward & Ramalingam, Abhijit, 2019. "Framing effects in public good games: Choices or externalities?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 42-45.
    16. Hernando Santamaría-García & Miguel Burgaleta & Agustina Legaz & Daniel Flichtentrei & Mateo Córdoba-Delgado & Juliana Molina-Paredes & Juliana Linares-Puerta & Juan Montealegre-Gómez & Sandra Castelb, 2022. "The price of prosociality in pandemic times," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    17. Rapanos, Theodoros, 2023. "What makes an opinion leader: Expertise vs popularity," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 355-372.
    18. Felgenhauer, Mike, 2021. "Experimentation and manipulation with preregistration," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 400-408.
    19. Edward Cartwright & Michalis Drouvelis, 2024. "Social framing effects in leadership by example: Preferences or beliefs?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(4), pages 1629-1651, October.
    20. Muhammad Nawaz & Ghulam Abid & Talat Islam & Jinsoo Hwang & Zohra Lassi, 2022. "Providing Solution in an Emergency: COVID-19 and Voice Behavior of Healthcare Professionals," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    COVID-19; Hand washing; Face cover; Distance; Framing; Survey experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:inrvec:v:72:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s12232-024-00482-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.