Abstract
Use of fear appeals assumes that when people are emotionally confronted with the negative effects of their behaviour they will change that behaviour. That reasoning is simple and intuitive, but only true under specific, rare circumstances. Risk perception theories predict that if people will experience a threat, they want to counter that threat. However, how they do so is determined by their coping efficacy level: if efficacy is high, they may change their behaviour in the suggested direction; if efficacy is low, they react defensively. Research on fear appeals should be methodologically sound, comparing a threatening to a non-threatening intervention under high and low efficacy levels, random assignment and measuring behaviour as outcome. We critically review extant empirical evidence and conclude that it does not support positive effects of fear appeals. Nonetheless, their use persists and is even promoted by health psychology researchers, causing scientific insights to be ignored or misinterpreted.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 111-125 |
| Number of pages | 15 |
| Journal | Health Psychology Review |
| Volume | 12 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2018 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- 2-YEAR FOLLOW-UP
- AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS
- BEHAVIOR-CHANGE
- CIGARETTE WARNING LABELS
- Fear appeals
- HEALTH MESSAGES
- NEUROSCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE
- PROTECTION MOTIVATION THEORY
- SELF-AFFIRMATION
- SHOWING LEADS
- SMOKING-CESSATION PROGRAMS
- extended parallel process model
- graphic health warnings
- review
- threatening communication
Cite this
}
Ignoring theory and misinterpreting evidence : the false belief in fear appeals. / Kok, Gerjo; Peters, Gjalt-Jorn Y; Kessels, Loes T.E.; ten Hoor, Gill A.; Ruiter, Robert A.C.
In: Health Psychology Review, Vol. 12, No. 2, 2018, p. 111-125.Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › Academic › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Ignoring theory and misinterpreting evidence
T2 - the false belief in fear appeals
AU - Kok, Gerjo
AU - Peters, Gjalt-Jorn Y
AU - Kessels, Loes T.E.
AU - ten Hoor, Gill A.
AU - Ruiter, Robert A.C.
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - Use of fear appeals assumes that when people are emotionally confronted with the negative effects of their behaviour they will change that behaviour. That reasoning is simple and intuitive, but only true under specific, rare circumstances. Risk perception theories predict that if people will experience a threat, they want to counter that threat. However, how they do so is determined by their coping efficacy level: if efficacy is high, they may change their behaviour in the suggested direction; if efficacy is low, they react defensively. Research on fear appeals should be methodologically sound, comparing a threatening to a non-threatening intervention under high and low efficacy levels, random assignment and measuring behaviour as outcome. We critically review extant empirical evidence and conclude that it does not support positive effects of fear appeals. Nonetheless, their use persists and is even promoted by health psychology researchers, causing scientific insights to be ignored or misinterpreted.
AB - Use of fear appeals assumes that when people are emotionally confronted with the negative effects of their behaviour they will change that behaviour. That reasoning is simple and intuitive, but only true under specific, rare circumstances. Risk perception theories predict that if people will experience a threat, they want to counter that threat. However, how they do so is determined by their coping efficacy level: if efficacy is high, they may change their behaviour in the suggested direction; if efficacy is low, they react defensively. Research on fear appeals should be methodologically sound, comparing a threatening to a non-threatening intervention under high and low efficacy levels, random assignment and measuring behaviour as outcome. We critically review extant empirical evidence and conclude that it does not support positive effects of fear appeals. Nonetheless, their use persists and is even promoted by health psychology researchers, causing scientific insights to be ignored or misinterpreted.
KW - 2-YEAR FOLLOW-UP
KW - AROUSING COMMUNICATIONS
KW - BEHAVIOR-CHANGE
KW - CIGARETTE WARNING LABELS
KW - Fear appeals
KW - HEALTH MESSAGES
KW - NEUROSCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE
KW - PROTECTION MOTIVATION THEORY
KW - SELF-AFFIRMATION
KW - SHOWING LEADS
KW - SMOKING-CESSATION PROGRAMS
KW - extended parallel process model
KW - graphic health warnings
KW - review
KW - threatening communication
U2 - 10.1080/17437199.2017.1415767
DO - 10.1080/17437199.2017.1415767
M3 - Review article
VL - 12
SP - 111
EP - 125
JO - Health Psychology Review
JF - Health Psychology Review
SN - 1743-7199
IS - 2
ER -