Message framing in communications on the consumption and production of sustainable seafood: The significance of negative emotions

This study investigates how different message frames impacts willingness to pay for sustainable alternatives and support for policies designed to bring about sustainable fishing practices. An online experiment was conducted with a sample from the Norwegian public ( N = 707) who were randomly assigned to reading different messages about the consequences of (un)sustainable fishing practices. A specific focus was placed on differences in message valence (positive vs. negative) and message perspective (general vs. personal). The analyses revealed significant total effects for three out of four message framing combinations on willingness to pay. Further examination of indirect effects indicated that both positively and negatively framed messages influenced willingness to pay and policy support primarily through negative emotions such as anger, worry, or sadness. In addition, there was an indirect effect of a negatively framed message through positive emotions for policy support. These findings suggest that emotional responses, particularly when negative, play a role in shaping sustainable seafood choices and public support for related policies, with message effectiveness depending less on framing features per se than on the emotions elicited. • Messages varied in valence and perspective (personal vs. general) • Messages increased willingness to pay and policy support via negative emotions • Personal–positive message framing directly increased willingness to pay • Message framing effects are not moderated by concern about sustainability