Self-Report and Psychophysiological Responses to Fear Appeals

Abstract

This study was designed to assess the relationship between self-report and psychophysiological responses to fear appeals and behavioral changes elicited by these. Ninety-two subjects watched one of four messages that varied in level of threat (high vs. low) and efficacy (high vs. low). Concomitantly, psychophysiological measures (heart rate and skin conductance) were registered. Perceived threat and efficacy varied according to the characteristics of the message. High-threat messages elicited significantly different levels of autonomic arousal than low-threat messages. Following of behavioral recommendation was higher among subjects who were exposed to the high threat / high efficacy stimulus, those who reported high perceived threat, and for those who showed an autonomic response pattern related to the facilitation of attentional processes.

Young drivers' responses to anti-speeding advertisements: Comparison of self-report and objective measures of persuasive processing and outcomes

“…Further, self-reported ratings of subjective arousal were consistent with the objective SCR findings (i.e., higher arousal self-ratings which corresponded with the detected increases in SCR activity). Similarly, Ordoñana et al (2009) found that participants rated greater fear and showed increased SCR activity towards high threat-based tetanus vaccination messages compared with the low threat-based message. Collectively, these studies reveal consensus between the self-report and objective measures of arousal and highlight that advertisements that contain emotional stimuli may generate greater automatic arousal responses.…”

“…Although such psychophysiological measures are relatively uncommon in research within the road safety advertising context, in the health communication context more broadly, a number of studies have applied SCR to assess psychophysiological responses and, in doing so, have highlighted the value of using such objective measures to assess automatic arousal (e.g., Lee and Lang 2009;Ordoñana et al 2009;Strasser et al 2009;Xu 2014). Lee and Lang (2009), for instance, examined SCRs to the emotional content of fear, anger, joy, and sadness, while participants were viewing a range of television messages.…”

The Extended Parallel Process Model

“…When fear is measured in an empirical study, it is usually assessed by participants indicating how "frightened," "scared," and "anxious" they are about a specific health threat (e.g., McMahan et al, 1998). At least one study assessed fear through physiological measurements-changes in skin conductance and heart rate (Ordoñana, González-Javier, Espín-López, & Gómez-Amor, 2009). However, a fear-arousing message could produce diverse physiological reactions such as fight, flight, freezing, or simply increased attention depending on the situational and individual differences (Bradley & Lang, 2007).…”

“…Future research should look into measuring fear on a continuous basis, either through dial (by continuously turning a dial during the exposure to indicate their feelings of fear) or physiological measurements (e.g., Ordoñana et al, 2009).…”

“…Efficacy as a message feature (see Figure 1) comprises response efficacy (message features that emphasize the effectiveness of a response in averting the threat) and self-efficacy (information about the ability of the target audience to carry out the recommended response). As such, efficacy is often manipulated in the (Witte, 1998;Witte et al, 1996) Participants rate how "frightened," "scared," and "anxious" they are about a specific health threat on a 5-point Likert-type scale (e.g., McMahan et al, 1998) Physiological measurements-skin conductance and heart rate (Ordoñana et al, 2009) …”