Die Effektivität von schriftlichen und graphischen Warnhinweisen auf Zigarettenschachteln
Abstract
Zusammenfassung: In der vorliegenden Studie wurde die Effektivität von furchterregenden Warnhinweisen bei jugendlichen Rauchern und Raucherinnen analysiert. 336 Raucher/-innen (Durchschnittsalter: 15 Jahre) wurden schriftliche oder graphische Warnhinweise auf Zigarettenpackungen präsentiert (Experimentalbedingungen; n = 96, n = 119), oder sie erhielten keine Warnhinweise (Kontrollbedingung; n = 94). Anschließend wurden die Modellfaktoren des revidierten Modells der Schutzmotivation (Arthur & Quester, 2004) erhoben. Die Ergebnisse stützen die Hypothese, dass die Faktoren “Schweregrad der Schädigung” und “Wahrscheinlichkeit der Schädigung” die Verhaltenswahrscheinlichkeit, weniger oder leichtere Zigaretten zu rauchen, vermittelt über den Mediator “Furcht” beeinflussen. Die Verhaltenswahrscheinlichkeit wurde dagegen nicht von den drei experimentellen Bedingungen beeinflusst. Auch konnten die Faktoren “Handlungswirksamkeitserwartungen” und “Selbstwirksamkeitserwartungen” nicht als Moderatoren des Zusammenhangs zwischen Furcht und Verhaltenswahrscheinlichkeit bestätigt werden.
Abstract: This empirical study addressed the effectiveness of fear appeals on juvenile smokers. 336 smokers (mean age: 15 years) were exposed to written or graphic health warnings on cigarette packs (experimental conditions; n = 96, n = 119) or no health warnings (control condition; n = 94). Afterwards the factors of the revised model of protection motivation (Arthur & Quester, 2004) were assessed. Results support the prediction that the factors “probability of occurrence” and “severity of harm” affect the probability of smoking less or lighter cigarettes indirectly through the mediating variable fear. The experimental conditions, however, did not influence the probability of this behavior. The results also did not confirm the proposed moderating role of response efficacy or self-efficacy.
References
Arbuckle, J.L. , Wothke, W. (1997). Amos 4.0 user's guide . Chicago: Small Waters .Arthur, D. , Quester, P. (2004). Who's afraid of that ad? Applying segmentation to the protection motivation model. Psychology and Marketing, 21, 671– 696 .Bentler, P.M. , Bonett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588– 606 .Boster, F.J. , Mongeau, P. (1984). Fear-arousing persuasive messages. In R.N. Bostrom & B.H. Westley (Eds.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 8, pp. 330-375). Beverly Hills: Sage .Browne, M.W. , Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K.A. Bollen & J.S. Long (Eds.) Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage .Christiansen, G. , Stander, V. , Töppich, J. (2004). Die Drogenaffinität Jugendlicher in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 2004, Teilband Rauchen . Köln: Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung .Currie, C. (2004). Young people's health in context. Health behaviour in school-aged children (HBSC) study: International report from the 2001/2002 survey . Genf: WHO Regional Office Europe .Dillard, J.P. (1994). Rethinking the study of fear appeals: An emotional perspective. Communication Theory, 4, 295– 323 .Felser, G. (2001). Werbe- und Konsumentenpsychologie . Heidelberg: Spektrum .Fishburn, P.C. (1981). Subjective expected utility: A review of normative theories. Theory and Decision, 13, 139– 199 .Floyd, D.L. , Prentice-Dunn, S. , Rogers, R.W. (2000). A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 407– 429 .(2004). G + J-Branchenbild Tabakwaren . Hamburg: Gruner + Jahr .
Hammond, D. , Fong, G.T. , McDonald, P.W. , Cameron, R. , Brown, K.S. (2003). Impact of the graphic Canadian warning labels on adult smoking behaviour. Tobacco Control, 12, 391– 395 .Hastings, G. , Stead, M. , Webb, J. (2004). Fear appeals in social marketing: Strategic and ethical reasons for concern. Psychology and Marketing, 21, 961– 986 .Hovland, C.I. , Janis, I.L. , Kelley, H.H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press .Jäkle, C. , Keller, S. , Baum, E. , Basler, H-D. (1999). Skalen zur Selbstwirksamkeit und Entscheidungsbalance im Prozeß der Verhaltensänderung von Rauchern. Diagnostica, 45, 138– 146 .Leventhal, H. (1970). Findings and theory in the study of fear communications. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 119-186). San Diego: Academic Press .Loken, B. , Howard-Pitney, B. (1988). Effectiveness of cigarette advertisements on women: An experimental study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 378– 382 .Mackay, J. , Eriksen, M. (2002). The Tobacco Atlas . Genf: World Health Organization .Maddux, J.E. , Rogers, R.W. (1983). Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 469– 479 .Milne, S. , Sheeran, P. , Orbell, S. (2000). Prediction and intervention in health-related behavior: A meta-analytic review of protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 106– 143 .Mongeau, P. (1998). Another look at fear arousing messages. In M. Allen & R. Preiss (Eds.), Persuasion: Advances through meta-analysis. Creskill: Hampton Press .Petty, R.E. , Cacioppo, J.T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change . New York: Springer .Pierce, J.P. , Gilpin, E. (1996). How long will today's new adolescent smokers be addicted to cigarettes. American Journal of Public Health, 86, 253– 256 .Rogers, R.W. (1975). Protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Psychology, 91, 93– 114 .Ruiter, R.A.C. , Abraham, C. , Kok, G. (2001). Scary warnings and rational precautions: A review of the psychology of fear appeals. Psychology and Health, 16, 613– 630 .Schwarzer, R. (2004). Psychologie des Gesundheitsverhaltens. Eine Einführung in die Gesundheitspsychologie (3. Auflage). Göttingen: Hogrefe .Sutton, S. (1982). Fear Arousing communications: A critical examination of theory and research. In J. Eiser (Ed.), Social psychology and behavioral medicine (pp. 303-337). New York: Wiley .Tanner, J.F. , Hunt, J.B. , Eppright, D.R. (1991). The protection motivation model: A normative model of fear appeals. Journal of Marketing, 55, 36– 45 .Weinstein, N.D. , Sandman, P.M. (1993). Some criteria for evaluating risk messages. Risk Analysis, 13, 103– 114 .Weinstein, N.D. , Sandman, P.M. , Roberts, N.E. (1992). A model of the precaution adoption process: Evidence from home radon testing. Health Psychology, 11, 170– 180 .Wheaton, B. , Muthén, B. , Alwin, D.F. , Summers, G.F. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. In D.R. Heise (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1977 (pp. 84-136). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass .Witte, K. , Allen, M. (2000). A meta-analysis of fear appeals: Implications for effective public health campaigns. Health Education & Behavior, 27, 591– 615 .Zillmann, D. , Gan, S. (1996). Effects of threatening images in news programs on the perception of risk to others and self. Medienpsychologie: Zeitschrift für Individual- und Massenkommunikation, 8, 288– 305 .
