5.2 Framing effects

Main objectives

The objective of this WP is to examine whether framing of communications provided by a single organisation (not a coalition of parties) can improve the perceived credibility and trustworthiness of the information provided.

This main objective will be pursued by examining:

how framing communications about CCS-activities in terms of Corporate Social Responsibility affects the image of the organization in question,
how gain-frames vs. loss-frames affect public responses to CCS-activities.

Corporate Social Responsibility vs. Economic benefits

With regard to the first issue (framing of CCS-activities in terms of economic benefits vs. benefits for Corporate Social Responsibility), a survey study will examine what current views of the general public are with respect to the perceived relation of CCS-activities of specific organisations with economic concerns on the one hand and Corporate Social Responsibility concerns on the other.

The perceived concerns will in turn be related to the perceived trustworthiness and credibility of communications and decision making of the organization in question. Subsequently, experiments will be carried out, to examine the effectiveness of potential interventions aiming to improve the corporate image by framing their CCS-activities in different ways (e.g., morality frame vs. competence frame and sustainability frame vs. short term gain frame).

CCS Gains vs losses

The second issue will be examined with similar procedures. A survey-type study will assess the extent to which the general public currently tends to perceive CCS-activities in terms of gains (e.g., focusing on potential benefits of CO2 capture) or losses (focusing on potential risks of CO2 storage), and how this relates to their acceptance of uncertain outcomes and their willingness to support different types of activities that aim to reduce CO2 emissions.

Subsequently, experimental studies will systematically examine the effects of providing different frames (i.e., focusing on CO2 capture vs. storage, and focusing on potential gains vs. losses more generally) on the willingness of the general public to support CCS-activities.