This study investigates the impact of guilt-framed environmental communication campaigns on emotional response, cognitive dissonance, and intentions toward pro-environmental behavior. Drawing on Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957), the research explores whether emotionally charged guilt appeals can induce psychological discomfort that motivates individuals to align future behaviors with environmentally responsible norms. Grounded in a media and communication framework, the study emphasizes the strategic role of message framing in shaping perception and behavioral outcomes.

A between-subjects experimental design was employed, exposing 144 participants to either guilt-framed or neutral-framed visual campaign messages. Emotional reactions, cognitive dissonance, and behavioral intentions were assessed using validated scales, while prior General Ecological Behavior (GEB) was measured as a control variable. Results showed that while participants exposed to guilt-framed messages reported slightly higher levels of cognitive dissonance and behavioral intentions compared to the neutral condition, these differences did not reach statistical significance. However, a significant positive correlation was found between cognitive dissonance and behavioral intentions, supporting the theoretical framework. Additionally, photo-based, emotionally charged visuals elicited stronger emotional responses than illustrated ones, demonstrating the importance of visual framing. Exploratory analyses revealed that individuals with stronger prior pro-environmental behaviors experienced less cognitive dissonance when exposed to guilt-framed messages, and gender moderated emotional reactions to different visual designs.

The study contributes to understanding the complex relationship between emotional framing, cognitive dissonance, and behavioral intention in environmental communication, highlighting both the potential and limitations of guilt-based messaging strategies.