Search
Results
Frontiers | What's in and what's out in branding? A novel articulation effect for brand names
We constructed brand names for diverse products with consonantal stricture spots either from the front to the rear of the mouth, thus inwards (e.g., BODIKA), or from the rear to the front, thus outwards (e.g., KODIBA). These muscle dynamics resemble the oral kinematics during either ingestion (inwards), which feels positive, or expectoration (outwards), which feels negative. In 7 experiments (total N = 1261), participants liked products with inward names more than products with outward names (Experiment 1), reported higher purchase intentions (Experiment 2), and higher willingness-to-pay (Experiments 3a–3c, 4, 5), with the price gain amounting to 4–13% of the average estimated product value.
Repeating Things Makes Them Seem True, Sort Of | Psychology Today
Illusory truth effect - The Decision Lab
Why do we believe misinformation more easily when it’s repeated many times?
Deliberate ignorance—a barrier for information interventions targeting reduced meat consumption?: Psychology & Health: Vol 0, No 0
Deliberate ignorance is a potential barrier for information interventions aiming to reduce meat consumption and needs to be considered in future interventions and research. Self-efficacy exercises are a promising approach to reduce deliberate ignorance and should be further explored.
We Need A Standard Unit Of Measure For Risk
Having a standardized unit of measure for risk would be helpful for our personal calculations, but it could also become a core part of the way the media or public health authorities talk about threats like epidemic disease, or even seasonal flu. Post-COVID—if we ever get there—I suspect I will still be interested to know if the flu risk starts to climb in New York, even by a few micromorts—I wouldn’t radically change my plans, but I might put on a mask in the subway for a few weeks. For the past seventy years, every single local news broadcast has been telling you what the temperature is going to be tomorrow, and the chance of precipitation. Why shouldn’t they also include genuinely life-or-death odds?
Estimating everyday risk: Subjective judgments are related to objective risk, mapping of numerical magnitudes and previous experience
A difficulty for investigating the accuracy of everyday risks perception has been the lack of an obvious objective framework on which to compare subjective responses. This difficulty stands in contrast to other fields of risk research. For example, risk perception in health contexts, uses the probability of death or ill health (e.g. as compiled by disease data registries) as the objective comparator [2, 3, 27]; and in financial fields, losses and gains in gambling tasks can be used as an objective comparator [28, 29]. In the current study the concept of MicroMorts is introduced as an objective risk framework to investigate the accuracy of everyday risk perception. We have around a one in a million chance of dying from an accident or incident every day, and this acute risk is quantified as one MicroMort [30, 31]. That is, MicroMorts are units that index acute risk (i.e. sudden death): one MicroMort is a one-in-a-million chance of death. We increase our risk through our choices of activities, for example, skydiving has a MicroMort value of 10, walking 27 miles has a MicroMort value of one, and giving birth has a MicroMort value of 120 (i.e. 10, 1 or 120 chance in a million chance of dying respectively) [31]. MicroMorts enable us to compare the acute risk of death from various activities, for example, a general anaesthetic and a sky-dive both carry the same acute risk of death, 10 MicroMorts (10 in one million people will die as a result of doing either). This MicroMort framework is being increasingly being used to index health risks and provide a framework for risk communication, including patient consent [31–33]
Does scaring people work when it comes to health messaging? A communication researcher explains how it's gone wrong during the COVID-19 pandemic
TheoryPicker
Which theory of behavior change can help you plan a health communication intervention for a large audience? There is no single right answer, but some theories will fit your needs better than others. The purpose of this tool is to rank-order some commonly used theories by their degree of fit with your behavior change challenge.
Inducing feelings of ignorance makes people more receptive to expert (economist) opinion
I sort of believe that - Frontline BeSci
There are surely many ways in which our beliefs can be quite nuanced. We examined the different ‘styles’ of belief we come up against in a variety of the work we do and observed a number of ways these styles appear: Suspension of disbelief: We know not to look too closely at something – we think that overall it is a good thing (e.g. recycling) but aware of possible discrepancies (e.g. being poorly disposed of) that may or may not lead us to question our positive beliefs. We are aware of the possible conflicts but this does not make our belief in the value of recycling any less valid. There are a great many beliefs that we have that could be challenged yet they serve us sufficiently well that we do not need to interrogate them too closely (political representation, eating meat) Inconsistent beliefs: Linked to this, we may hold two conflicting beliefs at the same time. We may know that wild fires are a natural phenomenon that predates climate change; but also that the fires we see in many areas today are of a much greater intensity and frequency. Exactly which is responsible cannot really be picked out, we can only really see the patterns emerging at a more macro-level, so it is not unreasonably to either hold both as true for even consider that the fire you have experience is a normal wild fire. Off-loading beliefs to others: Much of the time our beliefs about how things work is not something that we each individually work out, but we rely on a community of knowledge to work on our behalf. How many of us can be sure that our beliefs are correct about how vaccines work or indeed even how a zipper work. If we are questioned, then we recognise that our belief about how something works is tenuous but we have a good enough sense of it that allows us to function. Unformed beliefs: Sometimes we have not quite worked out what our beliefs are about something, which means that we may well move about in those beliefs or in the strength to which we hold onto them. The vaccination example outlined earlier is a good case in point. Not sure fully believe it but ‘there is something in it’ beliefs: Recent work we have been doing on Conspiracy Theories suggests that people may consider something is believable (e.g. Princess Diana’s death in a car crash was not accidental) but at the same time, in a different question then say they ‘do not fully believe it but there is something in it’. So what might seem like a belief is actually something much more akin to a questioning stance.
Development and Testing of a Short Form of the Patient Activation Measure
The Patient Activation Measure is a valid, highly reliable, unidimensional, probabilistic Guttman‐like scale that reflects a developmental model of activation. Activation appears to involve four stages: (1) believing the patient role is important, (2) having the confidence and knowledge necessary to take action, (3) actually taking action to maintain and improve one's health, and (4) staying the course even under stress. The measure has good psychometric properties indicating that it can be used at the individual patient level to tailor intervention and assess changes. (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00269.x)
When Debunking Scientific Myths Fails (and When It Does Not): The Backfire Effect in the Context of Journalistic Coverage and Immediate Judgments as Prevention Strategy
Entertainment-Education and Health and Risk Messaging - Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication
How Curiosity Makes You Crave - Scientific American
Unsticking Stuck Mental Models: Adventures in Systems Change
Daniel J. O’Keefe PUBLICATIONS AND PAPERS
research on health comm messaging effects
Why Guilt and Fear Appeals Backfire
reactance
Appealing to fear: A Meta-Analysis of Fear Appeal Effectiveness and Theories
Fear appeals are effective. The present meta-analysis found that fear appeals were successful at influencing attitudes, intentions, and behaviors across nearly all conditions that were analyzed. Even when a moderator was unrelated to fear appeal effectiveness, fear appeals were still more effective than comparison treatments. Further, there was not one level of any moderator that we tested for which fear appeals backfired to produce worse outcomes relative to the comparison groups.
Is that halo LED..? How a 100 year-old piece of behavioural science could help solve a very modern behavioural challenge. | LinkedIn
Often, there's a disproportionate focus on pre-existing attitudes or other exogenous factors explaining why behavioural interventions may not work. In other words, attitudes or other factors got in the way of the intervention being effective. But that's not necessarily the case, as this study suggests. Instead, it might be the nature of the intervention itself which blocks the behaviour (change).
Using Narrative Communication as a Tool for Health Behavior Change: A Conceptual, Theoretical, and Empirical Overview
Narrative is the basic mode of human interaction and a fundamental way of acquiring knowledge. In the rapidly growing field of health communication, narrative approaches are emerging as a promising set of tools for motivating and supporting health-behavior change. This article defines narrative communication and describes the rationale for using it in health-promotion programs, reviews theoretical explanations of narrative effects and research comparing narrative and nonnarrative approaches to persuasion, and makes recommendations for future research needs in narrative health communication.
Reducing fear to influence policy preferences: An experiment with sharks and beach safety policy options - ScienceDirect
This article reports on new research that finds certain messages reduce fear of sharks, key to promoting conservation-minded responses to shark bites. Here it is argued that the sophistication in public feelings toward these highly emotional events has allowed new actors to mobilize and given rise to the ‘Save the Sharks’ movement. In a unique experiment coupling randomly assigned intent-based priming messages with exposure to sharks in a ‘shark tunnel’, a potential path to reduce public fear of sharks and alter policy preferences is investigated. Priming for the absence of intent yielded significant fear extinction effects, providing a viable means of increasing support for non-lethal policy options following shark bite incidents. High levels of pride and low levels of blame for bite incidents are also found. In all, this article provides a step towards improving our understanding of fear and fear reduction in public policy.
People use less information than they think to make up their minds | PNAS
Understanding how messaging is perceived by the public through a new theoretical model – Please keep to the path
The results lead to some useful messaging recommendations, such as active publics being more effectively moved to action through motivational frames, rather than diagnostic (i.e. problem-focused) or prognostic (i.e. solution-focused) frames.
Please don’t leave the path
A negatively framed message (i.e. which describes the behavior that should not be done) is more effective, at least in this context, than a positive framed message that describes the preferred behavior.
Persuasive Messages Couched In Emotion May Backfire
New research finds that people tend toward appeals that aren't simply more positive or negative but are infused with emotionality, even when they're trying to sway an audience that may not be receptive to such language. The findings appear in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science
Stop Raising Awareness Already | Stanford Social Innovation Review
Researchers say they've figured out what makes people reject science, and it's not ignorance - ScienceAlert
Useful Theory: Self-Determination | CommunicateHealth
Why You Can't Persuade People With Facts | Ray Williams | LinkedIn
Fear-Based Appeals Effective at Changing Attitudes, Behaviors After All
Scaring People to Improve Health Works, But Can Have Downsides : Shots - Health News : NPR
Why Fear Has No Place in Environmental Campaigns | I Ctrl Shift
Behavior change communications and health-related decisions | Deloitte University Press
Excellent coverage of why health behavior change is so difficult and some of the most relevant theories (including Consumer Information Processing Model)
Boost your influence with 17 persuasion techniques (book review) - GET UP & START
Threatening communication: a critical re-analysis and a revised meta-analytic test of fear appeal theory
HealthCommWorks
Beyond "This Is Your Brain On Drugs": 4 Ways That Scare Campaigns Can Change Bad Habits | Co.Exist | ideas + impact
The Psychology of Influence | Social Media Today
CDC - Health Communication Science Digest
The Assessment of User Engagement with eHealth Content: The eHealth Engagement Scale
Nudging for Nothing - no effect found in message framing
Emotion-Based Messages: WIC - Touching Hearts, Touching Minds
Homer Simpson for Nonprofits: The Truth About What People Really Think and What It Means for Promoting Your Cause
Positive Reinforcement vs. Negative Consequences
Framing Science
What makes one health communication ad effective and another not? There are many variables that can make or break the success of the message.