Effects of fear and specificity of recommendation upon attitudes and behavior.

Leventhal, Howard; Singer, Robert; Jones, Susan

doi:10.1037/h0022089

Cited by 552 publications

(309 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

301

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on action plans has been suggested long ago. Leventhal, Singer, and Jones (1965) have stated that fear appeals can facilitate health behavior change only when combined with specific instructions on when, where, and how to perform them. Renewed attention to planning emerged when the concept of implementation intentions was introduced (Gollwitzer, 1999).…”

Section: Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the previous study by Renner and Schwarzer (2005), it was found that objective risk predicted risk perception, but the latter did not translate into an intention to eat a healthy diet. Both the objective and subjective risk, may not be functional for health behavior change if not accompanied by other motivational factors (see also Leventhal et al, 1965). This has implications for interventions in particular subsamples.…”

Section: Selfefficacymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social-cognitive predictors of dietary behaviors in South Korean men and women

Renner¹,

Kwon

Yang

et al. 2008

Int. J. Behav. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Selfefficacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Social-cognitive predictors of dietary behaviors in South Korean men and women

Renner¹,

Kwon

Yang

et al. 2008

Int. J. Behav. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research on the effects of implementation intentions on health goal attainment recalls Leventhal's (Leventhal, Singer, & Jones, 1965;Leventhal, Watts, & Pagano, 1967) work on the conjoint effects of fear appeals and related recommendations on health promotion (to stop smoking) and health protection (taking tetanus inoculation shots) behaviors. Leventhal observed that high fear appeals facilitated these behaviors only when participants also received specific instructions on when, where, and how to perform them.…”

Section: Implementation Intentions and Unpleasant Goal Pursuitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans.

Gollwitzer¹

1999

American Psychologist

4,195

114

3,597

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When people encounter problems in translating their goals into action (e.g., form New Year's resolutions earn at best a sympathetic smile when they announce their heroic intentions (e.g., exercising regularly, avoiding unhealthy foods). Though the audience may concede that such resolutions are made with good will (Oscar Wilde is less trusting), they doubt their effectiveness. This suspicion is deeply rooted. Folklore tells us that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." Do good intentions deserve this bad reputation? As the many empirical studies based on Ajzen's (1985) theory of planned behavior demonstrate, there is no reason to assume that good intentions have nil effects or even negative effects on behavior. Quite to the contrary, strong intentions (e.g., "I strongly intend to do x") are reliably observed to be realized more often than weak intentions (see reviews by Ajzen, 1991; Conner & Armitage, in press;Godin & Kok, 1996). However, the correlations between intentions and behavior are modest; intentions account for only 20% to 30% of the variance in behavior. As well, the strength of the intention-behavior relation varies drastically with the type of behavior that is specified, and people's past behavior commonly turns out to be a better predictor than their intentions. Most interesting, the weak intention-behavior relation is largely due to people having good intentions but failing to act on them (Orbell & Sheeran, 1998).In light of these findings, it seems unjustified for applied psychologists to advise people who are motivated to do good to refrain from forming good intentions, but suggesting that good intentions are an effective self-regulatory tool is also unwarranted. What is needed is a theoretical and empirical analysis of how people's good intentions can be made more effective. Once this is known, forming good intentions and effective ways to implement them can be suggested to people who are motivated to change their behavior.How good intentions can be implemented effectively has been analyzed in recent research on goal striving (for a review, see Gollwitzer & Moskowitz, 1996). Forming good intentions or setting goals is understood as committing oneself to reaching desired outcomes or to performing desired behaviors. For various reasons, people may often refrain from such binding goal commitments (e.g., Oettingen, in press), but even if people make goal commitments, the distance between goal setting and goal attainment is often long (Gollwitzer, 1990). Successful goal attainment requires that problems associated with getting started and persisting until the goal is reached are effectively solved.The question of how goals, once set, can be made more effective therefore boils down to asking for the variables that determine effective goal pursuit. Some answers are suggested by recent research on goal striving. First, it matters how people frame their good intentions or goals. For instance, better performances are observed when people set themselves challenging, specific goals as compared...

show abstract

“…If they do not have time now, and postpone making the donation, it is possible they will never get around to donating. Leventhal, Singer and Jones (1965) provide Yale students with information about tetanus and then ask them if they plan to get inoculated. The majority of students said they planned to get inoculated, but only a small minority did.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transaction Costs, the Opportunity Cost of Time and Inertia in Charitable Giving

Knowles

Servátka²

2013

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conduct a laboratory experiment to analyze the effect transactions costs and inertia have on charitable giving. We conjecture that transaction costs will have a greater effect on donations if the solicitation is received when the opportunity cost of time is high. Inertia could become a factor if people intend to give, but postpone making the payment until they have more time, and having postponed making the donation once, keep doing so. We find evidence of a transaction cost effect, with the size of this effect depending on the opportunity cost of time, but no statistically significant inertia effect.Keywords: Charitable giving; dictator game; transaction costs; opportunity cost of time;inertia. JEL Classifications: C91; D64 Acknowledgements: Earlier versions of the paper were presented at the New Zealand Association of Economists Conference (Wellington, June 2013), the Australia New Zealand Experimental Economics Workshop (Brisbane, August 2013), the Science of Philanthropy Initiative Conference (Chicago, October 2013), the North American Experimental Economics Association Conference (Santa Cruz, October 2013) and in the University of Otago Seminar Programme (Dunedin, September 2013). We are grateful to participants for the many helpful comments received. Financial support was provided by the School of Business at the University of Otago and the College of Business and Economics at the University of Canterbury. (Orman, 2004: attributed to T. Trueblood) Introduction.This is not actually a paper about fishing, but about giving money to charity. The above quote, however, sums up what this paper is about if "go fishing" is replaced with "donate".Just as going fishing can be put off to another day, so can donating money to charity. This paper analyzes whether people are subject to such inertia with respect to charitable giving. In particular we ask whether some people intend to give money to charity, but simply never get around to doing so? For example, someone may read an email asking for a donation and is inclined to donate, but as she is busy preparing for a meeting decides to wait until after the meeting to click on the link to the charity's website and enter her credit card details. It is then possible, that having delayed making the donation once, she will do so again, until the opportunity to donate has passed.Why do people postpone making their donations? Does the presence of transaction costs combined with a high opportunity cost of time at the moment of solicitation reduce donations? 1 Both questions have important policy implications as finding ways to reduce transaction costs, and the potential for inertia, could increase donations to charity.The three issues mentioned in the title of the current paper go hand in hand. We conjecture that inertia is likely to exist in the presence of transaction costs when two other conditions are satisfied simultaneously: (1) making a donation does not have to be made on the spot but can be postponed until later (which is usually the case with requests sent ...

show abstract

Effects of fear and specificity of recommendation upon attitudes and behavior.

Cited by 552 publications

References 17 publications

Social-cognitive predictors of dietary behaviors in South Korean men and women

Social-cognitive predictors of dietary behaviors in South Korean men and women

Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans.

Transaction Costs, the Opportunity Cost of Time and Inertia in Charitable Giving

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About