When the temporal distance of choice near from present, people focused on decision made by avoidance of loss or anticipated regret(negative outcome) from wrong choice. But, people focused on decision made by positive outcome from right choice when the temporal distance of choice at a far-future. Thus, we hypothesized that negative message framing is effective at the situation that making a decision on vaccination now(or near-future), while positive message framing is effective when the decision making is delayed(far-future). Experiments were designed by 2(temporal distance of choice: now vs. future) x 2(message framing: positive vs. negative) between-subjects factor, and participants were 124 undergraduates, who were randomly assigned to one of four experimental condition groups. As a result, the effect of positive message framing was significant at the usage of future temporal distance of choice, while the effect of negative message framing failed to reach statistical significance. In study 2, we extended findings from study 1 by assessing positive message framing, showed moderating effect, examined the effect of message framing depends on temporal distance of choice(now vs. future). We hypothesized that abstract message is effective when the temporal distance of choice at a far-distance, whereas concrete message is effective at a near-distance. To examined this hypothesis, Experiments were designed by 2(now vs. future) x 2(concrete vs. abstract) between-subjects factor. As a result, the main effect of temporal distance of choice reached significant(higher intention of vaccination) in the situation that far-distance from present. And the concrete message is effective when the temporal distance of choice near from present, while abstract message is effective at a far-distance.