open access
메뉴.png){kind=logo}
open access
메뉴
본 연구는 개인의 정치성향이 친사회적 행동에 미치는 영향을 메시지프레이밍과 대상과의 심리적 거리를 중심으로 살펴보고자 하였다. 친사회적 행동 영역을 개인영역인 기부활동과 사회적 시스템 구축에 대한 의사결정으로 구분하여 총 두 번의 실험을 실시하였다. 실험 1은 개인영역의 대표적인 친사회적 행동인 기부영역에서 개인의 정치성향, 메시지프레이밍(이득 혹은 손실), 기부자-수혜자간 심리적 거리(국내 혹은 국외 수혜자)에 따른 결식아동에 대한 기부금액 차이를 살펴보았다. 실험결과, 개인 정치성향과 메시지프레이밍 상호작용 효과가 나타났다. 구체적으로 진보성향 사람들은 이득메시지가 제시되었을 때 손실메시지가 제시될 때에 비하여 기부금액이 더 높게 나타났다. 이와 반대로 보수성향 사람들은 이득메시지에 비하여 손실메시지가 제시될 때 기부금액이 더 높게 나타났다. 정치성향과 기부자-수혜자간 심리적 거리에 따른 상호작용이 나타났다. 진보성향 사람들은 심리적 거리감에 따른 기부금액 차이가 나타나지 않아 국내 및 국외 수혜자에 대하여 비슷한 수준의 기부의향을 보였으나, 보수성향 사람들은 심리적 거리가 가까운 국내결식아동에 대해 심리적 거리가 먼 국외결식아동에 비하여 기부금액을 더 많이 후원하겠다고 하였다. 실험 2에서는 친사회적 시스템 구축 의사결정에 있어 개인의 정치성향, 메시지프레이밍, 수혜자와의 심리적 거리를 중심으로 살펴보았다. 연구결과 진보성향의 사람들은 이득메시지가 제시될 때, 보수성향의 사람들은 손실메시지가 제시되었을 때 사회적 시스템 구축에 대한 투자의향 금액이 더 높게 나타났다. 또한 실험 1과 동일하게 진보성향의 사람들은 국내 혹은 국외 친사회적 시스템 구축에 대한 투자의향 금액 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 이에 반해 보수성향의 사람들은 국내 친사회적 시스템 구축할 경우 국외 친사회적 시스템 구축에 비하여 투자금액이 더 높게 나타났다. 본 연구는 정치영역에서 주로 다루었던 개인의 정치성향을 공공마케팅 영역에서 살펴보았다는 것에 이론적 시사점이 있다. 실무적으로는 최근 비영리기관에서 다양한 마케팅 활동을 통하여 개인 기부활동을 촉진하고자 노력하는데 이에 대한 효과적인 커뮤니케이션 전략을 제공할 수 있을 것이다.
This research examines how political ideology affects prosocial behavior. Especially. we focus on the interaction of political ideology and message framing, and also the interplay of political ideology and perceived psychological distance on target recipients. This study has a 2 (political ideology: liberal vs. conservative) x 2 (message framing: gain vs. loss) x 2 (psychological distance: near vs. far) design, Both the amounts willing to donate (study 1) and the amounts willing to invest (study 2) point out that the liberals are more sensitive to gain whereas the conservatives are more sensitive to loss. The interaction effect of political ideology and psychological distance is also significant. Whereas liberals intend to help (or invest for) the psychologically near and distant target groups equivalently, conservatives are more likely to donate to (or invest for) the psychologically near group than the psychologically distant group. This article concludes by discussing the theoretical implications of our findings for political ideology, message framing, and psychological distance and by suggesting practical implications.
이승조 (2013), 개인 성향으로서의 자존감과 긍ㆍ부정 프레이밍의 상호작용이 국제 기아 돕기 캠페인의 효과에 미치는 영향, 한국언론학보, 57(5), 56-77.
Aaker, J. L., & Lee, A. Y. (2001). “I” Seek Pleasures and “We” Avoid Pains: The Role of Self‐Regulatory Goals in Information Processing and Persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(1), 33-49.
Carney, D. R., Jost, J. T., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2008). The Secret Lives of Liberals and Conservatives: Personality Profiles, Interaction Styles, and the Things They Leave Behind. Political Psychology, 29(6), 807-840.
Carraro, L., Castelli, L., & Macchiella, C. (2011). The Automatic Conservative: Ideology-Based Attentional Asymmetries in the Processing of Valenced Information. PloS one, 6(11), e26456.
Chang, C. T., & Lee, Y. K. (2009). Framing Charity Advertising: Influences of Message Framing, Image Valence, and Temporal Framing on a Charitable Appeal. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39(12), 2910-2935.
Dovidio, John F. (1984). Helping Behavior and Altruism: An Empirical and Conceptural Overview. In Leonard Berkowitz(Eds), Advanced in Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 361-427.
Fernandes, D., & Mandel, N. (2014). Political Conservatism and Variety-Seeking. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(1), 79-86.
Förster, J. (2009). Cognitive Consequences of Novelty and Familiarity: How Mere Exposure Influences Level of Construal. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(2), 444-447
Graham, J., Haidt, J., & Nosek, B. A. (2009). Liberals and Conservatives Rely on Different Sets of Moral Foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029-1046.
Homer, P. M., & Yoon, S. G. (1992). Message Framing and the Interrelationships among Ad-based Feelings, Affect, and Cognition. Journal of Advertising, 21(1), 19-33.
Huber, M., Van Boven, L., McGraw, A. P., & Johnson-Graham, L. (2011). Whom to Help? Immediacy Bias in Judgments and Decisions about Humanitarian Aid. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 115(2), 283-293.
Janoff-Bulman, R., Sheikh, S., & Baldacci, K. G. (2008). Mapping Moral Motives: Approach, Avoidance, and Political Orientation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(4), 1091-1099.
Janoff-Bulman, R. (2009). To Provide or Protect: Motivational Bases of Political Liberalism and Conservatism. Psychological Inquiry, 20(2-3), 120-128.
Janoff-Bulman, R., & Carnes, N. C. (2013). Surveying the Moral Landscape Moral Motives and Group-based Moralities. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20(10), 1-18.
Jost, J. T., & Amodio, D. M. (2012). Political Ideology as Motivated Social Cognition: Behavioral and Neuroscientific Evidence. Motivation and Emotion, 36(1), 55-64.
Joel, S., Burton, C. M., & Plaks, J. E. (2014). Conservatives Anticipate and Experience Stronger Emotional Reactions to Negative Outcomes. Journal of Personality, 82(1), 32-43.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339-375.
Jost, J. T. (2006). The End of the End of Ideology. American Psychologist, 61(7), 651-670.
Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political Ideology: Its Structure, Functions, and Elective Affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307-337.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 263-291.
Kidwell, B., Farmer, A., & Hardesty, D. M. (2013). Getting Liberals and Conservatives to Go Green: Political Ideology and Congruent Appeals. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(2), 350-367.
Lavine, H., Burgess, D., Snyder, M., Transue, J., Sullivan, J. L., Haney, B., & Wagner, S. H. (1999). Threat, Authoritarianism, and Voting: An Investigation of Personality and Persuasion. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(3), 337-347.
Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All Frames are not Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149-188.
Lee, A. Y., & Aaker, J. L. (2004). Bringing the Frame into Focus: The Influence of Regulatory Fit on Processing Fluency and Persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(2), 205-218.
Martin, R., & Randal, J. (2008). How is Donation Behaviour Affected by The Donations of Others?. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 67(1), 228-238.
Maheswaran, D., & Meyers-Levy, J. (1990). The Influence of Message Framing and Issue Involvement. Journal of Marketing Research, 361-367.
Olivola, C., & Liu, W. (2009). Symposium Summary. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 190-194.
O'Keefe, D. J., & Jensen, J. D. (2007). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed loss-framed messages for encouraging disease prevention behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Journal of health communication, 12(7), 623-644.
Okten, C., & Osili, U. O. (2007). Preferences for International Redistribution.
Reinhart, A. M., Marshall, H. M., Feeley, T. H., & Tutzauer, F. (2007). The Persuasive Effects of Message Framing in Organ Donation: The Mediating Role of Psychological Reactance. Communication Monographs, 74(2), 229-255.
Schneider, T. R., Salovey, P., Pallonen, U., Mundorf, N., Smith, N. F., & Steward, W. T. (2001). Visual and Auditory Message Framing Effects on Tobacco Smoking. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(4), 667-682.
Shang, J., Reed, A., & Croson, R. (2008). Identity Congruency Effects on Donations. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(3), 351-361.
Shook, N. J., & Clay, R. (2011). Valence Asymmetry in Attitude Formation: A Correlate of Political Ideology. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1-6.
Shook, N. J., & Fazio, R. H. (2009). Political Ideology, Exploration of Novel Stimuli, and Attitude Formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 995-998.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal Construal. Psychological Review, 110(3), 403-421.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-Level Theory of Psychological Distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440-463.
van der Toorn, J., Napier, J. L., & Dovidio, J. F. (2013). We the People Intergroup Interdependence Breeds Liberalism. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 20(10), 1-7.
White, K., MacDonnell, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2011). It's the Mind-set that Matters: The Role of Construal Level and Message Framing in Influencing Consumer Efficacy and Conservation Behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(3), 472-485.
Winterich, K. P., Mittal, V., & Ross Jr, W. T. (2009). Donation Behavior Toward in‐Groups and Out‐Groups: The Role of Gender and Moral Identity. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(2), 199-214.
Zhao, G., & Pechmann, C. (2007). The Impact of Regulatory Focus on Adolescents' Response to Antismoking Advertising Campaigns. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(4), 671-687.
