THE AGRICULTURE ANGLE: EFFECT OF FRAMING AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY MESSAGES ON ATTITUDES AND INTENT TO PUBLISH WITHIN THE ELABORATION LIKELIHOOD MODEL By COURTNEY ALYSSA MEYERS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2008 1 © 2008 Courtney Alyssa Meyers 2 To my husband, Daniel Meyers 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS A number of people have contributed to my success in graduate school and the completion of my doctoral degree. I want to first thank my committee members whose individual and collective input made my dissertation research more rigorous and the entire process a worthwhile endeavor. I thank Dr. Maria Gallo who provided a valuable biological scientist’s perspective and the content necessary for the message stimuli. I thank Dr. Debbie Treise whose expertise in science communication greatly benefited the conceptual and theoretical framework for the study. I thank Dr. Anna Ball who always asked thoughtful questions and challenged me to more closely evaluate the organization of my arguments. I thank Dr. Ricky Telg for his close editing and attention to detail, which improved my writing and the overall quality of my dissertation. Finally, I thank my committee chair, Dr. Tracy Irani, for her support and encouragement, revision of numerous drafts, and continual advice to improve my ability as a researcher and future faculty member. I have benefited from working in an extraordinary academic department that values graduate students and provides numerous opportunities for their success. I thank Jodi DeGraw who always had an answer to every question and was eager to help me through any situation requiring paperwork. I thank the wonderful support staff, Holly O’Ferrell and Rachel Harris, who make the department “run.” I always enjoyed visiting with them both and I know they sincerely care about the students in the department. Finally, to Dr. Edward Osborne, I want to extend my sincere gratitude for both financial and personal support during my time in Florida. The advice and insight he provided in Faculty Roles class was extremely beneficial in helping me obtain a faculty position and my preparation to become an assistant professor. I thank him for all he does to make the department a wonderful place to earn a graduate degree. 4 Although three years in graduate school can seem like a never-ending sequence of writing papers and taking exams, it is the friends I have made that helped that time fly by and leave me with mixed feelings as I move on. I thank all my fellow graduate students, past and present, who made this experience so enjoyable. I especially thank Emily Rhoades for her guidance as my mentor in the department and Shannon Arnold for her valuable advice and entertaining conversations. I look forward to many collaborative research projects together as friends and colleagues. I also want to thank many other fellow graduate students – Wendy Warner, Elio Chiarelli, Brian Estevez, Katy Groseta, Christy Windham, Ann DeLay, Lauri Baker, Robert Strong, Marlene von Stein, Rochelle Strickland – who made me laugh and relax despite any level of stress. I thank Katie (Chodil) Abrams who has been my classmate, teaching partner, research collaborator, and friend. I could always count on her to share my accomplishments or struggles. Finally, I thank Carrie Pedreiro and her husband, Michael Pedreiro, for their most treasured friendship. They are wonderful role models of a loving couple and dedicated parents. I thank two people whose early influence helped me get this far. I thank Dr. Jefferson Miller, my master’s adviser at the University of Arkansas, who encouraged me to consider working toward a Ph.D. when the thought had never crossed my mind. I also thank Mr. Bill Johnston, my high school FFA advisor, who exposed me to the diverse possibilities available in agriculture and helped channel my competitive spirit and drive for success. My respect for education and love of learning was encouraged from an early age by my parents, Gary and Sheila Wimmer. I thank them for establishing high standards and providing the support necessary to realize my educational goals. I also thank my grandmother, Dorothy Wimmer, who fostered an appreciation for agriculture and demonstrated what a good work ethic truly is. I thank my dearest friend since conception, my twin sister, Gaea Wimmer, who I could 5 always count on to listen to my problems and share in my victories. Twins truly do share a special bond and I am extremely grateful to have her as my sister. The result of this effort and my doctoral education is shared with one very special person in my life, my husband Daniel Meyers. I could have never completed this degree without his constant encouragement and understanding. I thank him for taking care of chores and other responsibilities so I could concentrate on schoolwork or attend research conferences. He and our sweet dog Dash have been a source of great joy during any obstacles I faced. As we start the greatest adventure in our lives as parents to Isabel, I know he will continue to be my best friend and love of my life. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................4  LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................................10  LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................13  LIST OF DEFINITIONS ...............................................................................................................14  ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................15  CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................18  Science and the Public ............................................................................................................20  Science and Media ..................................................................................................................22  Application: Scientific Thinking and Educational Partnership (STEP) Program and Agricultural Biotechnology .................................................................................................27  Elaboration Likelihood Model ................................................................................................30  Framing ...................................................................................................................................31  Problem Statement ..................................................................................................................33  2 RELEVANT LITERATURE ..................................................................................................35  Attitudes and Persuasion .........................................................................................................35  Elaboration Likelihood Model ................................................................................................38  Issue Involvement and Personal Relevance ....................................................................39  Argument Quality ............................................................................................................41  Need for Cognition ..........................................................................................................44  Framing ...................................................................................................................................44  Framing Biotechnology ..........................................................................................................48  Framing and the Elaboration Likelihood Model ....................................................................50  Agenda Setting and Priming ...................................................................................................52  Public Relations and Framing .................................................................................................53  Summary .................................................................................................................................54  3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS ..............................................................................55  Overview .................................................................................................................................55  Research Questions and Hypotheses ......................................................................................56  Research Design .....................................................................................................................57  Subjects ...................................................................................................................................60  Message Stimuli ......................................................................................................................61  Message Stimuli Testing .........................................................................................................63  7 Independent Variables ............................................................................................................64  Message Frame ................................................................................................................65  Issue Involvement ............................................................................................................65  Attitudes toward Agricultural Biotechnology .................................................................66  Dependent Variables ...............................................................................................................67  Argument Quality ............................................................................................................67  Likelihood to Publish ......................................................................................................68  Attribute Variables ..................................................................................................................68  Instrumentation .......................................................................................................................69  Instrument Pilot Test .......................................................................................................69  Instrument Content ..........................................................................................................72  Procedure ................................................................................................................................73  Data Analyses .........................................................................................................................74  4 RESULTS ...............................................................................................................................76  Overview .................................................................................................................................76  Descriptive Analysis ...............................................................................................................76  Potential Error .................................................................................................................77  Demographics ..................................................................................................................81  Issue Involvement ............................................................................................................85  Preexisting Attitudes Toward Agricultural Biotechnology .............................................85  Agricultural Biotechnology Belief Statements ................................................................86  Attitudes Toward Message Topic ....................................................................................86  Likelihood to Publish ......................................................................................................87  Need for Cognition ..........................................................................................................88  The ELM Scales .....................................................................................................................89  Issue Involvement Scale ..................................................................................................89  Attitudes Toward Argument Quality ...............................................................................90  Need for Cognition Scale ................................................................................................91  Preexisting Attitudes Toward Agricultural Biotechnology .............................................92  Agricultural Biotechnology Belief Statements ................................................................93  Attitudes Toward Message Topic ....................................................................................94  Likelihood to Publish ......................................................................................................95  Manipulation Checks ..............................................................................................................96  Tests of Hypotheses ................................................................................................................99  Post Hoc Analyses ................................................................................................................106  Message Frame Identification .......................................................................................106  Attitudes and Message Frame .......................................................................................107  Need for Cognition ........................................................................................................108  Differences Between Organization Membership ..........................................................109  Index Development .......................................................................................................114  5 DISCUSSION .......................................................................................................................121  Overview ...............................................................................................................................121  Key Findings .........................................................................................................................122  8 Implications ..........................................................................................................................126  Limitations ............................................................................................................................130  Recommendations .................................................................................................................133  Recommendations for Theory and Future Research .....................................................133  Recommendations for Practitioners ..............................................................................135  Conclusions ...........................................................................................................................137  APPENDIX A PRE-NOTICE LETTER .......................................................................................................138  B E-MAIL CONTACTS ..........................................................................................................140  C INSTRUMENT .....................................................................................................................143  D MESSAGE VERSIONS .......................................................................................................159  LIST OF REFERENCES .............................................................................................................163  BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................................175  9 LIST OF TABLES Table page 4-1. Characteristics of Early and Late Survey Respondents ..........................................................79  4-2. Independent Samples T-Test to Compare Age of Early and Late Survey Respondents ........80  4-3. Independent Samples T-Test for Significant Differences Between Early and Late Respondents .......................................................................................................................81  4-4. Characteristics of Survey Respondents ..................................................................................83  4-5. Agreement with Agricultural Biotechnology Belief Statements ............................................87  4-6. Descriptive Statistics for Likelihood to Publish .....................................................................88  4-7. Personal Involvement Inventory for Advertising (PIIA) Scale Inter-item Consistency Statistics .............................................................................................................................90  4-8. Perceived Argument Quality Scale Inter-item Consistency Statistics ....................................91  4-9. Need for Cognition Scale Inter-item Consistency Statistics ..................................................91  4-10. Preexisting Attitudes toward Agricultural Biotechnology Scale Inter-item Consistency Statistics .............................................................................................................................93  4-11. Agricultural Biotechnology Belief Statements Scale Inter-item Consistency Statistics ......93  4-12. Attitudes toward Message Topic Scale Inter-item Consistency Statistics ...........................95  4-13. Likelihood to Publish Scale Inter-item Consistency Statistics .............................................95  4-14. Classification of Message Frame by Assigned Frame ..........................................................97  4-15. ANOVA for Subjects’ Perceptions of Message Frames ......................................................98  4-16. ANOVA for Message Frame, Issue Involvement, and Attitudes toward Agricultural Biotechnology on Perceived Argument Quality ................................................................99  4-17. Means for Attitudes Toward Argument Quality Split by High/Low Issue Involvement, More Positive/ Less Positive Attitudes Toward Agricultural Biotechnology, and Message Frame ................................................................................................................100  4-18. ANOVA for Message Frame, Issue Involvement, and Attitudes Toward Agricultural Biotechnology on Likelihood to Publish .........................................................................101  4-19. Means for Likelihood to Publish Split by High/Low Issue Involvement, More Positive/ Less Positive Attitudes Toward Agricultural Biotechnology, and Message Frame ........101  10