2Chaiken, S., Maheswaran, D., 1994. Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66:460-473.
3Donovan R. J., Jalleh, G., 1999. Positively versus negativity framed product attributes: The influence of involvement [J]. Psychology and Marketing 16:613-630.
4Fiske, S. T. 1980. Attention and weight in person perception: The impact of negative and extreme behavior [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38: 889-906.
5Lastovieka, J. L., Gardner, D. M., 1979. Components of involvement. in Attitude Research Plays for High Stakes, eds. John C. Maloney and Bernard Silverman, Chicago[J]: American Marketing Association: 53-73.
6Maheswaran, D., Meyers-Levy, J. 1990. The influence of message framing and issue involvement[J]. Journal of Marketing Research 27:361-367.
7Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., 1983. Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and contemporary approaches [ M ]. Westview Press, Oxford.
8Shiv, B., Edell, J. A., Payne, J. W., 1997. Factors affecting the impact of negatively and positively framed ad messages [J ]. Journal of Consumer Research 24:285-294.
9Smith, G., Wortzel, Late Lawrence H., 1997. Prior knowledge and the effect of suggested frames of reference in advertising [J]. Psychology and Marketing 14: 121-143.
10Suri, R., Monroe, K.B., 2003. The effects of time constraints on consumers' judgments of prices and products [J]. Journal of Consumer Research 30: 92-104.
