Effects of fear arousal and reassurance on attitude change.

Abstract

An experiment among 40 smokers and 40 nonsmokers is reported testing a hypothesized Fear Arousal X Reassurance interaction effect on attitudes toward smoking and on the belief that smoking causes lung cancer. The interaction effect was confirmed for the beliefs of smokers: increments in fear arousal produced greater increments in belief under high-reassurance than under low-reassurance conditions. Contrary to predictions based upon the alleged effects of fear arousal in punishment versus avoidance situations, there were no significant triple-order interactions involving smokers versus nonsmokers, nor were there any significant Smoking X Fear interaction effects on the dependent variables.

A Protection Motivation Theory of Fear Appeals and Attitude Change1

“…The evidence on the importance of the third component, the efficacy of the recommended response, is rather consistent. Although Dabbs and Leventhal (13) found no effect of an efficacy manipulation, Chu (11), Rogers and Deckner (61), and Rogers and Thistlethwaite (62) in efficacy of a coping response increased compliance with the communicator's recommendations. Therefore, there is evidence that the three components of a fear appeal specified by protection motivation theory are important determinants of attitude change.…”

Keeping our network safe: a model of online protection behaviour

“…Regarding the vulnerability of the threat, Janis and Feshbach (1953) and Leventhal et al (1967) demonstrated that the intention to accept a recommended protective behaviour is higher when people consider themselves more vulnerable to the threat than when they consider themselves less vulnerable to the danger. Perceived response efficacy that the recommended response or measure will be available and effective was positively related to intentions to carry out protective behaviour (Chu 1966, Rogers andThistlethwaite 1970), as is protective self-efficacy belief about one's perceived ability to successfully perform protective behaviours (Maddux andRogers 1983, LaTour et al 1996). By increasing any of the six components, protection motivation increases and protective behaviours are more likely to be performed (Maddux and Rogers 1983).…”

The Social Power of Health‐Care Practitioners as Agents of Change

“…By giving reassurance and satisfying the patients' stress-induced motivation for affiliation, a practitioner can alleviate fear and related emotional states (Janis, 197 1; Schachter, 1959). Further, since health-care warnings themselves may have fear-provoking components, and high levels of fear can motivate patients to ignore, minimize, or even deny the importance of the threat, a reassuring health-care provider can have a major impact on whether or not such warnings are attended to and recommended activities carried out (Janis, 1967; Rogers and Thistlethwaite, 1970; Rogers and Mewborn, 1976).…”

“…This procedure is called stress inoculation (Janis, 1958;Meichenbaum, 1977). Without a trusting relationship based on referent power, such procedures could be viewed as threats or high fear-provoking statements, which may prove under certain conditions to be ineffective or to have effects on behavior opposite to those intended (Janis and Terwilliger, 1962; Rogers and Thistlethwaite, 1970).…”