Most mobile technology systems designed to encourage healthy decisions focus on prescriptive persuasion, telling the user either implicitly or explicitly what to do, as the primary means of improving health. However, other technically and socially viable options exist. Drawing on both relevant social theory and previous CSCW research, this paper suggests that open-ended social awareness, making users aware of both others' and their own decisions, may also serve as an effective central design principle for mobile health. To explore this approach, this paper presents analysis of qualitative data from two studies of such a system.Results suggest that open-endedness allowed users flexibility and freedom in defining what counts as health, and that the social aspects compounded both the positive and the occasionally negative impacts of this openness. The paper concludes with implications for the design and evaluation of research on mobile health technology, as well as suggestions for how future work can further explore the design space of mobile health beyond prescriptive persuasion.

Parents often underestimate the degree to which their children engage in risky online

This article introduces the construal level theory of mobile persuasion. Concepts associated with both construal level theory and mobile technology are articulated through a literature review and synthesized into a series of assumptions that relate specifically to persuasive communication. Eight theoretical propositions are proposed, introducing three message functions: shifting construal level orientation, bridging construal level perception of choice, and traversing psychological distance to choice. We argue that conceptual relationships between the affordances of mobile technology and construal level theory make mobile devices particularly suited to test and implement these propositions. Message success and message resistance are discussed through this framework. We specify the potential to use construal level theory in effective mobile health interventions and propose a research agenda to further apply construal level theory to the process of communication.

Three studies provide empirical, social scientific tests of alternatives to the originally proposed U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cigarette package warning labels on health risk beliefs, perceived fear, and effectiveness. Our research addresses questions at the root of the legal disputes surrounding FDA regulation of cigarette package warning labels. Specifically, we describe results from three studies that investigate the mediating role of health beliefs and perceived fear in shaping message effectiveness and intentions to quit. The first study featured nonsmoking young adults, while the second and third studies sampled adult daily smokers. Each study was a randomized experiment with five warning-label image conditions: full-color graphic warning labels, black-and-white graphic warning labels, warning text (no graphic image), Surgeon General's warning labels, and no warning. Results consistently indicate that graphic warning labels (in both color and black-and-white) promote increased perceptions of fear, which in turn are associated with greater (perceived and actual) effectiveness. We conclude with a discussion of the results, highlighting implications, public policy considerations, and suggestions for future research.

Objectives We tested how variations of the warning message on e-cigarette packages influenced risk and ambiguity perceptions, and whether including a modified risk statement on the package influenced how the warning label was perceived. Method A 4 (warning text) × 2 (modified risk statement), plus control, experiment (N = 451) was conducted. Results Smoking status, sex, and the language used in the warning statements interacted to influence risk perceptions. For example, non-smoking women perceived e-cigarettes with the FDA text at 30% of the package as riskier than the FDA text at 12-point type. Additionally, including a modified risk statement on the package increased ambiguity among non-smokers, as did an abstract warning label. Conclusions When evaluating the effectiveness of warning label text, it is important to consider smoking status and sex. Additionally, including modified risk statements on the package with the warning label could potentially increase ambiguity among non-smokers.