Can the effectiveness of health promotion campaigns be improved using self-efficacy and self-affirmation interventions? An analysis of sun protection messages

Abstract

Health-risk communications frequently target self-efficacy in order to encourage adaptive responses. Research has also indicated that self-affirmation may be a useful supplementary or alternative intervention technique. This study compared the effects of self-efficacy, self-affirmation and a combination of these techniques for two risk messages. Young British females (N=677) read about ultraviolet light and skin cancer or skin ageing ('photoageing') and were randomly assigned to a single intervention (self-affirmation/self-efficacy), the combined intervention or no intervention. The efficacy intervention led to greater message acceptance and perceived risk in both the cancer and photoageing conditions, while the only main effect of self-affirmation was on acceptance of the photoageing message. However, self-affirmation moderated the effect of efficacy information. For photoageing messages, efficacy information was associated with greater message acceptance only amongst self-affirmed participants, but the opposite occurred for skin cancer messages. Although these findings should be interpreted cautiously, they imply that health promoters should select efficacy information if only one intervention is used but that self-affirmation can influence responsiveness to efficacy interventions for particular messages.

Evidence of improved fluid management in patients receiving haemodialysis following a self-affirmation theory-based intervention: A randomised controlled trial

“…One exception to this lack of variation was patients' reported perceived threat at baseline though the difference remained non-significant. Self-affirmed patients rated the health message to be more threatening than controls with small effect sizes observed (d=.21), consistent with previous research (Armitage et al, 2011;Good & Abraham, 2011). However the effect was lost when adjusted for clinical factors.…”

Effects of photoaging information and UV photo on sun protection intentions and behaviours: A cross-regional comparison

“…However, one possibility for why Iowa students who had seen their UV photo showed more yellow saturation (i.e., more tan) at the post-summer follow-up is that they may have reacted to the photo with greater defensiveness. That is, recent work has shown that young adults may demonstrate greater defensiveness in response to appearance-based interventions (Good & Abraham, 2011), perhaps because the sun exposure-photoaging link has traditionally received less attention in the media and, therefore, seems less well established than the sun exposureskin cancer link. The generally colder and less sunny climate of Iowa relative to Southern California may mean even less local media attention devoted to sun exposure risks, thus making it easier for Iowa participants to deny or question appearance-based messages.…”

A randomised trial to demonstrate the effectiveness of electronic messages on sun protection behaviours

“…Self-efficacy is related to performing sun protection behaviours [9,36,37,40,41]. Individuals have varying levels of self-efficacy about being able to do all the behaviours necessary to protect their skin [36].…”