Framing an issue as ending loss gains more support than as gaining benefit.

Evidence

An interesting example of the role of the reference point in the formation of public opinion was brought to our attention by the actor Alan Alda. The objective of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) can be framed in two essentially equivalent ways. On the one hand, the ERA can be presented as an attempt to eliminate discrimination against women. In this formulation, attention is drawn to the argument that equal rights for women are not currently guaranteed by the constitution, a negative state that the ERA is designed to undo. On the other hand, the ERA can be framed as legislation designed to improve women’s status in society. This frame emphasizes what is to be gained from the amendment, namely, better status and equal rights for women. If losses loom larger than gains, then support for the ERA should be greater among those who are exposed to the frame that emphasizes the elimination of discrimination than the improvement of women’s rights. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2454

Categorization

• XREF: Loss-framed persuasion (eliminating discrimination beats improving status) parallels the reference-point logic behind identity claims framed as restoration vs. construction — relevant to strategic essentialism as either recovering a true identity or building a new one. — connects to: Gains-framed arguments persuade less than loss-framed ones. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2454; Framing equivalent policy goals as loss-removal boosts support over gain-framing; Framing the same policy goal differently shifts public support by nine points — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2456
• SEED: Elegant natural experiment in framing — the same goal pitched as removing a loss beat the gain pitch; useable in an essay on how social-movement demands are best translated into policy language.

Broader Connections

• Gains-framed arguments persuade less than loss-framed ones. #corroborates (1.00) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2454
• Framing equivalent policy goals as loss-removal boosts support over gain-framing #corroborates (1.00)
• Framing the same policy goal differently shifts public support by nine points #expands (0.85) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 2456