Hostname: page-component-669899f699-8p65j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-27T02:55:30.142Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Testing effects of loss framing and checklists: evidence from a field experiment on wellness program participation in Philadelphia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2025

Syon P. Bhanot Open the ORCID record for Syon P. Bhanot [Opens in a new window] ,
Christina A. Roberto ,
Anjali Chainani ,
Charles Williamson  and
Mehra den Braven
Syon P. Bhanot*
Affiliation:
Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, USA
Christina A. Roberto
Affiliation:
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA
Anjali Chainani
Affiliation:
The City of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, USA
Charles Williamson
Affiliation:
Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, USA
Mehra den Braven
Affiliation:
Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, USA
*
e-mail: sbhanot1@swarthmore.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Loss framing and checklist formatting are two oft-cited tools for encouraging behavior change, but there is little causal evidence on their impact in field settings. We partnered with the City of Philadelphia to test the effectiveness of these tools to increase completion of the City’s wellness program. In our experiment, 5235 City employees and retirees were randomly assigned to receive one of four postcard versions (using a 2 × 2 design), whereby we varied both framing (gain or loss) and how instructions were provided (information only or information in checklist format). Our results suggest that neither loss framing nor the checklist formatting significantly influenced the likelihood that individuals would complete the wellness tasks, or how quickly they completed the tasks. We conclude that this specific form of employee behavior may be difficult to influence through the “passive” behavioral interventions we tested, and suggest that a more “active” approach may be required in such instances.

Keywords

Behavioral economicsChecklistsLoss framingExperimentRandomized control trialEvidence-based policy

JEL classification

H75: State and Local Government: Health • Education • Welfare • Public Pensions D90: General‡ I12: Health Behavior C93: Field Experiments
Type
Original Paper
Information
Journal of the Economic Science Association , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , December 2019 , pp. 210 - 222
Copyright
Copyright © Economic Science Association 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s40881-019-00077-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

References

Ashraf, N., Karlan, D., Yin, W. (2006). Tying Odysseus to the mast: evidence from a commitment savings product in the Philippines. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(2), 635–672. 10.1162/qjec.2006.121.2.635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baicker, K., Cutler, D., Song, Z. (2010). Workplace wellness programs can generate savings. Health Affairs, 29(2), 304–311. 10.1377/hlthaff.2009.0626CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berry, L., Mirabito, A., & Baun, W. (2010). What’s the hard return on employee wellness programs? Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2010/12/whats-the-hard-return-on-employee-wellness-programs.Google Scholar
Block, L. G., Keller, P. A. (1995). When to accentuate the negative: the effects of perceived efficacy and message framing on intentions to perform a health-related behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(2), 192–203. 10.1177/002224379503200206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boorman, D. (2001). Today’s electronic checklists reduce likelihood of crew errors and help prevent mishaps. ICAO Journal, 56, 17–20.Google Scholar
Byrnes, M., Schuerer, D., Schallom, M., Sona, C., Mazuski, J., Taylor, B. et al., (2009). Implementation of a mandatory checklist of protocols and objectives improves compliance with a wide range of evidence-based intensive care unit practices. Critical Care Medicine, 37(10), 2775–2781. 10.1097/00003246-200910000-00015CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choi, J., Lee, K., Ji, Y. (2012). What type of framing message is more appropriate with nine-ending pricing? Marketing Letters, 23(3), 603–614. 10.1007/s11002-012-9164-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, S., Belfort, M., Saade, G., Hankins, G., Miller, D., Frye, D. et al., (2007). Implementation of a conservative checklist-based protocol for oxytocin administration: maternal and newborn outcomes. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 197(5),480. 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.026CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuellar, A., Haviland, A., Richards-Shubik, S., LoSasso, A., Atwood, A., Wolfendale, H. et al., (2017). Boosting workplace wellness programs with financial incentives. The American Journal of Managed Care, 23(10), 604–610.Google ScholarPubMed
Detweiler, J., Bedell, B., Salovey, P., Pronin, E., Rothman, A. (1999). Message framing and sunscreen use: gain-framed messages motivate beach-goers. Health Psychology, 18(2),189. 10.1037/0278-6133.18.2.189CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellingsen, T., Johannesson, M., Mollerstrom, J., Munkhammar, S. (2013). Gender differences in social framing effects. Economics Letters, 118(3), 470–472. 10.1016/j.econlet.2012.12.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fryer, R. G. Jr, Levitt, S. D., List, J., & Sadoff, S. (2012). Enhancing the efficacy of teacher incentives through loss aversion: a field experiment. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giné, X., Karlan, D., Zinman, J. (2010). Put your money where your butt is: a commitment contract for smoking cessation. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2(4), 213–235.Google Scholar
Hallsworth, M., List, J., Metcalfe, R., Vlaev, I. (2017). The behavioralist as tax collector: using natural field experiments to enhance tax compliance. Journal of Public Economics, 148, 14–31. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2017.02.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynes, A., Weiser, T., Berry, W., Lipsitz, S., Breizat, A., Dellinger, P. et al., (2009). A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. New England Journal of Medicine, 360, 491–499. 10.1056/NEJMsa0810119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hossain, T., List, J. A. (2012). The behavioralist visits the factory: Increasing productivity using simple framing manipulations. Management Science, 58(12), 2151–2167. 10.1287/mnsc.1120.1544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, D., Molitor, D., & Reif, J. (2018). What do workplace wellness programs do? Evidence from the illinois workplace wellness study. Working paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292. 10.2307/1914185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindenmeier, J. (2008). Promoting volunteerism: effects of self-efficacy, advertisement-induced emotional arousal, perceived costs of volunteering, and message framing. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 19(1), 43–65. 10.1007/s11266-008-9054-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macapagal, K., Janssen, E., Matson, M., Finn, P., Heiman, J. (2017). The impact of gain-and loss-framed messages on young adults? sexual decision making: an experimental study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(2), 385–394. 10.1007/s10508-015-0679-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyerowitz, B. E., Chaiken, S. (1987). The effect of message framing on breast self-examination attitudes, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 500–510. 10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.500CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Keefe, D., Jakob, J. (2009). The relative persuasiveness of gain-framed and loss-framed messages for encouraging disease detection behaviors: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Communication, 59, 296–316. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01417.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richburg-Hayes, L., Anzelone, C., Dechausay, N., & Landers, P. (2017). Nudging change in human services: final report of the behavioral interventions to advance self-sufficiency (bias) project. OPRE Report 2017-23, Washington DC: Office of Planning and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
Thaler, R., Benartzi, S. (2004). Save more tomorrow?: using behavioral economics to increase employee saving. Journal of Political Economy, 121(S1), S164–S187. 10.1086/380085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458. 10.1126/science.7455683CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Volpp, K. G., John, L. K., Troxel, A. B., Norton, L., Fassbender, J., Loewenstein, G. (2008). Financial incentive-based approaches for weight loss: a randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 300(22), 2631–2637. 10.1001/jama.2008.804CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Bhanot et al. supplementary material

Online Appendix
Download Bhanot et al. supplementary material(File)
File 34.8 KB